The post WLFI alleges coordinated attack as USD1 shrugs off brief depeg appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. World Liberty Financial [WLFI] said a “coordinated The post WLFI alleges coordinated attack as USD1 shrugs off brief depeg appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. World Liberty Financial [WLFI] said a “coordinated

WLFI alleges coordinated attack as USD1 shrugs off brief depeg

World Liberty Financial [WLFI] said a “coordinated attack” targeted its USD1 stablecoin on Monday, 23 February. This came after the token briefly slipped below its $1 peg amid a burst of online speculation and heavy trading.

In a post shared around mid-afternoon, World Liberty Financial claimed that attackers had compromised several accounts linked to cofounders. 

Also, it claimed they amplified fear through social media and opened large short positions in WLFI-related markets to profit from the volatility. WLFI said the effort ultimately failed, pointing to USD1’s rapid return to parity.

“Thanks to USD1’s sound mint-and-redeem mechanism and full 1:1 backing, we are trading steadily at par,” the company said, urging users to rely on verified channels for accurate information.

Source: X

What triggered the volatility?

Market data shows USD1 trading slightly below $1 for a short period, with prices dipping to the $0.995–$0.998 range before rebounding. 

The move coincided with heightened discussion on X following unrelated investigative teases by onchain investigator, ZachXBT. Some users speculated about links to the WLFI ecosystem.

Several posts claimed that Eric Trump — World Liberty Financial cofounder — had deleted WLFI-related messages, fuelling concern around the project. 

However, a review of available posts shows no clear evidence that his account had previously published WLFI-related content. 

While references to World Liberty Financial as a company do exist, a specific search for WLFI on his page didn’t yield any results. Claims of deleted token-specific posts cannot be independently verified.

Market response, not structural stress

Despite the sharp intraday move, USD1’s price action suggests a liquidity-driven reaction rather than a breakdown in the stablecoin’s backing or mechanics. 

The token quickly reverted to trading at or near $1, consistent with WLFI’s assertion that mint-and-redeem flows absorbed selling pressure.

Source: CoinMarketCap

Also, analysis of the WLFI token showed it dipped around the same time as its stablecoin counterpart. Its price dropped to around $0.108 before bouncing back to around $0.113, as of this writing.

Source: CoinGecko

WLFI did not provide technical details to substantiate claims of hacked accounts or paid influencer activity, and no independent evidence has yet emerged confirming coordinated manipulation. 

Still, the episode underscores how rapidly sentiment-driven narratives can impact even fully backed stablecoins in thin or reactive market conditions.


Final Summary

  • USD1 briefly dipped below $1 but recovered quickly, suggesting liquidity stress rather than structural failure
  • WLFI alleges a coordinated attack, though key elements of that claim remain unverified

Previous: Missouri enters in Bitcoin race after 2025 failure: What’s different this time?
Next: Binance Coin: Can BNB reclaim $600 or is $576 next?

Source: https://ambcrypto.com/wlfi-alleges-coordinated-attack-as-usd1-shrugs-off-brief-depeg/

Market Opportunity
WLFI Logo
WLFI Price(WLFI)
$0.1103
$0.1103$0.1103
-2.73%
USD
WLFI (WLFI) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.